It’s not 1996 anymore. There’s too much actual crypto deployed, in too many ways, to realistically impose top-down USG escrow.
-
-
Replying to @clipperhouse
@clipperhouse You think they can pass a law that targets just Apple and Google?2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tqbf
@tqbf@clipperhouse You pass a law requiring communications providers to turn over cleartext on demand, with modest fines for noncompliance.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @matthew_d_green
@matthew_d_green@clipperhouse Could they pass that law? Yes. Will they pass that law? No. Would that law result in escrow? No.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tqbf
@tqbf@clipperhouse They can't pass that law in the current security environment, no. They can *write* that law. And they're doing it today.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @matthew_d_green
@matthew_d_green@clipperhouse So what? They can’t pass the law. It’s impossible to implement.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tqbf
@tqbf@clipperhouse It's completely possible to implement if there's another -- even minor -- terrorist attack.2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @matthew_d_green
@matthew_d_green@clipperhouse A de novo top-down encryption standard?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tqbf
@tqbf@clipperhouse No. They'll just say "messaging network operators are now required to produce plaintext on demand" or fines.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Jann Horn Retweeted API ERROR
Jann Horn added,
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.